Penni, I would agree wholeheartedly that the borderline mentally retarded and other less seriously handicapped are the primary beneficiaries of deinstitutionalization. I remember volunteering as a teenager, particularly with Down syndrome children, and of course they have become much more accepted since that time, to the extent that they go to regular schools, live at home with their parents and siblings, and more research has been done on their optimal development, so that their potential has been realized much more fully. In a society where we have very seriously disturbed people acting out right in front of the grocery store and the bank courtesy of these broad social decisions, small differences like those the borderline mentally retarded exhibit simply pale by comparison.
You might be surprised to hear that San Francisco is simply a group of neighborhoods, and that one you live there it seems like a very small, intimate, place, although I do remember visiting here before I moved in, and certainly understand why it would be perceived as a large--and seemingly less caring, city. But in reality every neighborhood has its own "characters", the specific and familiar homeless people who have decided to park their lives there. In fact, there was an older, mentally ill homeless man that my husband and his workmates adopted for several years, bringing him food, clothing, shoes, blankets, and trying to help him get medical care and other services. I know that my husband gives several dollars a day to the same homeless people, month after month, as well. You are right, though, that in a large city, there would be less notice made of a particular individual wandering around, looking lost and disoriented, because so many people look that way, and passersby would not know where that person belonged. We also have large organizations advocating for the homeless, driving around in vans feeding them and trying to find them shelter.
Practicality and moderation? Yes, I would agree that they have been lost. Every society has a part of its underclass which will never be self-sufficient, and while I would argue, moderately, that everyone who can help take care of themselves should do so, it is unrealistic to believe that everyone can. So while all the back-to-work programs for welfare recipients, for example, are wonderful in theory, and very important in not continuing to create an expectation of governmental help for future generations, it is too harsh of an expectation for some borderline individuals who are too far gone, too damaged, to return to productivity.
I guess what surprises me most is that there is seemingly so little concern sometimes not only for the human suffering of the people at the edge of society, but so little awareness for how much unpleasantness and actual danger is created for other citizens as the result. It would seem to me to be very "Republican" to not want to be the victim of a crime or to see suffering and pain right on the sidewalks as we go about our daily lives, and to want to live in a safe and well-ordered society, but perhaps I am wrong. It seems funny to me that people live in public, because when I was young, it was not like that, but it seems totally normal to my daughter. Is this decreased expectation for humanity a callousness that will continue, and does it degrade our society?
Sorry, talking about hot buttons, I am beginning to ramble, so I will stop!
Christine |
